President Obama started his term by passing a politically toxic stimulus bill. Next, he oversaw a politically toxic auto bailout. He then spent an agonizing year on a politically toxic health reform bill. His approval ratings dropped, the Tea Party erupted, and as he continued to do controversial things—on gay rights, on immigration, on Iraq—pundits continued to accuse him of political malpractice.

Well, he won anyway. And there’s a lesson there.

The lesson is: DO STUFF!

It is no secret that I think Obama had a tremendously productive first term; the subtitle of my book was “The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era.” But this is a lesson for Republicans, too. Most politicians spend an extraordinary amount of time and energy fretting about the political consequences of their policies, which is understandable, because politicians who don’t get reelected become ex-politicians. But in the end, your reelection might come down to a waiter with an iPhone at a Florida fundraiser, or your opponent’s silly comment about “self-deportation.” So you might as well do what you think is right while you’ve got the power to do it. When you finally get the keys to the government car, drive it.

AZQT...a "personal defense weapon" is not an AR-15, it is a specific class of weapon, and have been used by government agencies for decades The MP7 and the Colt MARS are two examples of PDWs Learn something about a topic before commenting on it

Rosemont IL

Username hidden
(3844 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

I have always been amused at the Right as they in one breath claim Obama has done nothing he promised, and in the next breath claim he has methodically worked his evil plan to destroy America one political victory at a time Which is it? Can't be both I don't care which one they pick, but it has to be one or the other The FACT is, is you look at the FACTS on a line by line basis, Obama has accomplished more of what he promised and what WE THE PEOPLE elected him to do (twice by over 51%) than any President in his first term since FDR.

Rosemont IL

Username hidden
(3844 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

azrugg quotes from Natural News. Other article headlines from this site include:

- Black cumin: The secret miracle heal-all remed

- Gun owners go 'Gandhi' in New York with plans for mass civil disobedience over Cuomo's tyrannical gun grab

- Learn how to detoxify electromagnetic radiation and more with bentonite clay

- Shock claim: Obama removing all military leaders from command if they will not fire on U.S. citizens

- Why every U.S. city is like a Brazilian nightclub inferno with no exits for the masses

Apparently it's a site favored by those who will believe anything and question nothing. Always a market for such people.

In yet another huge blow to the rhetoric and narrative of the Obama administration and its desire to disarm the American public, a DHS bid has been uncovered showing that the Department of Homeland Security recently put out an offer to purchase 7,000 full-auto “assault weapons” to be used domestically, inside the USA. Keep in mind that President Obama is on the record saying, “AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals; that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities.” But it seems he really means they don’t belong on the streets of our cities unless they are in the hands of homeland security enforcers, in which case they can be FULL-AUTO assault weapons.

The juiciest part of this bid is the use of the phrase “Personal Defense Weapons” to describe the full-auto AR-15s being purchased by DHS. Apparently, when YOU hold an AR-15, it’s an “assault rifle.” But magically, if you hand that same rifle to an armed government homeland security enforcer, it instantly transforms itself into a “personal defense weapon.”

Peoria AZ

Username hidden
(2404 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

I did not know 'the debate' was exclusively about mass murder by assault rifles. That's truly a small part of the issue, as far as gun laws.

Because some people use faulty logic -- Chicago has strict gun laws and lots of murders, for example -- it seems reasonable to point to statistics about gun trafficking from state to state.

I don't see how the purported intention of those who provide these stats is more important than the facts themselves. Or how some perceived bias makes the stats "bullshit".

Hendersonville NC

Username hidden
(2984 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Fun, I am one who pointed out issues with Outdoors’ posts regarding statistics on gun related injuries/deaths. In a nutshell, the recent high interest in the gun control debate here centered around mass murders, specifically those involving assault style rifles. Statistics he used to bolster his position against firearms in a discussion about mass murder included deaths/injuries involving ALL firearms by ALL means.

He then chose to drag that discussion about valid statistics into another thread, apparently saying that people only agree with statistics that agree with their position. Had he not done that, I was ready to continue the discussion instead of deciding he is not worth responding to anymore. Hence my use of the word Troll.

What I tried to get across to him was: How logical is it to include statistics regarding negligent injuries/deaths, catastrophic failure of a firearm, suicide, etc. in discussions about murder/mass murder? Especially when the gist of the recent topic discussions have been about a specific class of firearms. He also stated that the sole purpose of a firearm (i.thatl firearms) is to maim and kill. I've addressed that argument by several people here in the past.

I pointed out a couple of several issues with a website he was using to bolster his position and hoped he would take a more objective look at the site, but he apparently didn't wish to do that.

His logic in his posts of statistics related to firearms is equivalent to those who argue the following lines on other topics:

“Ban all automobiles because a handful have been involved in deaths involving an intoxicated operator.” Then support that position by posting all death/injury statistics where an automobile is involved, including DUI’s and where a mechanic may have died when an automobile slipped off a hoist and killed the mechanic as he worked on it. Hell, an auto was involved wasn’t it? Therefore it's an auto related death/injury.

“Place restrictions on eating utensils because some have been used by people to become obese.” You get the idea.

Finally, I have found humor is some of Outdoors' posts. Hell, I've found humor in a lot of posts by people I disagree with.

Brooklyn Park MN

Username hidden
(4925 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Fun, you can hold Mrs. G’s hand, or any other part of her as far as I’m concerned, but I ain’t holding hands with you unless you need some help getting in or out of a boat.

You do not want to hear me sing Kumbaya or any other song for that matter.

Brooklyn Park MN

Username hidden
(4925 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

"Still looking for the conservative who can maintain an intelligent discussion."

VaBeach is the only intelligent conservative here with whom I've had any debates of substance. Both of us found things we could agree upon and the conversations actually stimulated thought and prompted both of us to consider things in a new light. We have often disagreed, but never disagreeably.

I have only skimmed the forums lately and am not familiar with the exchange you referenced. I highly doubt that Va harbors any race-based bigotry of any sort. Although I have no desire to wade through the dozens of recent gun-control threads, I would like to see the exchange you quoted. Can you point me to it?

Belle Chasse LA

Username hidden
(11927 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

One recent and clear example of (what I think of as) trolling was by VB, who put up stats that showed blacks commit 5 times more gun murders per capita than whites; and "how could one escape the conclusion" that blacks should be banned from owning guns?

I replied that this was not at all the inference, that the socio-economic situation was much more correlated than race. Then he said I'd called him a racist, and I'd had a knee jerk reaction to what he himself called a "provocative" post, blah blah.

I think there is an intelligent conservative in here, and when engaging them, they invariably implode, melt down, or self immolate. Facts get under their skin, and they're allergic.

Still looking for the conservative who can maintain an intelligent discussion.

Hendersonville NC

Username hidden
(2984 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Outdoors, maybe I should clarify. Most posters here make trolling comments at least a little bit from time to time; it goes with the territory. I'm not trying to say you do it all the time, only that you seem to get under their skin for some reason.

One thing I've noticed, and which might explain that, is that you have a subtle sense of humor that sometimes goes over people's heads. There are 2-3 pretty intelligent conservatives here, and I've been surprised that even they have seemed to miss your humorous points at times and took offense at something that you prolly intended just in jest. IDK.